The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-02-21
MORE PENSION vETOEs.
Why the Claims of Charlotte O'Neal and
John Reed, ST., Were Rejected.

Why the Claims of Charlotte O'Neal and
John Reed, sr., Were Rejected.
WASHINGTON, Feb. 19-The President sent
two messages to the Senate, to-day, vetoing ap
act granting a pension to Charlotte O'Neal and
act granting pension to John Reed, sr. The
frstnamed bill proposed to grant a pension to
the widow of Richard O'Neal. late colonel of the
Twenty sixth Regiment Indiana Volunteers. II
his message IN this case the President says:
1.-THE records of the War Department fail to
show that there colonel of the Twenty
sixth Indiana Regiment named Richard O'Neal,
out 1t does appear that Richard Neal was lieu
tenant-colonel of said regiment; that he was
mustered in Aug. 81, 1861, and resigned June 80.
1867. If this is the officer whose widow is named
in the BILL the proposition is to pension the widow
OF a soldier who, after ten months service, re-
signed. and who. seven months after his resigna-
tion, died of disease which in manner related
to his military service. There is, beside. such
discrepancy between the name given in the bill
and the name of the officer who served as lieu
tenant-colonel in the regiment mentioned, that
ii the merits were with the widow, the bill
would need further congressional consideration"
In his message returning the act granting o
pension to John Reed, sr.. the President says:
THE records show that the beneficiary named
in this bill filed application for pension in 1877
alleging that he was the father of John Reed,
who died in the service, and that his wife, the
InoehcI VI tue CeceaSeu SOICler, Oteu MAY ~,
1872, and that he, the father. was mainly de-
pendent upon his son for support He filed evi-
dence OF the mothers death, and one witness al
legged that he was present at her death and at
tended her funeral In 1864, Martha Reed, the
mother OF the soldier made her application for
pension. in which she at first claimed to be the
widow Of John Reed. She afterwards alleged
that her husband, John Reed. abandoned his
family in 1859, and had not thereafter contrib
uted To their support, and that the soldier waa
her main support after such abandonment. She
was allowed a pension as dependent mother,
which commenced in 1862, the date of her sons
death, and seems to have terminated July %,
1884, when she died. The claim of the father
was rejected in 1883, for the reason that the
mother who had prior right, still living;
and when his claim was again pressed, in 1856, he
was informed that his abandonment of
his family precluded the idea that he was enti-
tied to pension as being dependent upon the
soldier for support OF course, these decisions
were correct in law in equity and in morals
This case demonstrates the means employed in
attempts to cheat the government in applica-
tlons for pensions--too often successful The al
legation of 1877, of the man who poses
the aged and dependent father of dead soldier
that the mother cied in 1872, when at that time
ner claim was pending for pension, largely based
upon his abandonment the afidavit of the man
who testified that he her die in 1872; the eff.
| frontery of this unworthy father renewing hig
claim after the detection of his fraud ard the,
actual death of the mother, and the allegation of
| the mother that she widow, when in fact
| she was abandoned wife, show the processes
which enter into these claims for pensions and
| the boldness with which plans are sometimes
| concOcted to rob the government by actually
traflicking in death and inn posing upon the sacred
sentiments of patriotism and national gratitude